Howe v. Stratton
Appellate Court of Illinois
Assumpsit.—Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philir Stein, Judge presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1902. This is a suit in assumpsit brought by Stratton against the Howes. The summons was issued February 17, T899. With the general issue each defendant filed a plea of the five years statute of limitations. The plaintiff replied that each of the defendants had made promises to pay and had made payments on the account within five years, etc.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit.—Error to the Superior Court of Cook County; the Hon. Philir Stein, Judge presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1902. This is a suit in assumpsit brought by Stratton against the Howes. The summons was issued February 17, T899. With the general issue each defendant filed a plea of the five years statute of limitations. The plaintiff replied that each of the defendants had made promises to pay and had made payments on the account within five years, etc. The defendants filed separate rejoinders. The verdict was for the plaintiff, assessing his damages a,t $397.78. The…
1Opinion of the Court
Mr. Presidtno Justice Ball
delivered the opinion of the court.
While the testimony is conflicting, there is ample evidence in the record, if believed by the jury, to sustain the verdict. The question submitted to the jury was purely one of fact. The verdict thereon will not be set aside by an appellate tribunal, where the evidence is conflicting, unless it is clearly against the weight of the evidence. Green v. Mumper, 138 Ill. 434.
Further, on the motion for a new trial defendants alleged that the verdict was against the evidence. In such a case the trial judge reviews the testimony, considers…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Kallenbach v. DickinsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1881
- Green v. MumperIllinois Supreme Court · 1891